The Allahabad High Court has upheld the decision of the State Government and the Uttar Pradesh Education Service Selection Commission to cancel the result of the written examination conducted for recruitment to 910 posts of Assistant Professor in aided non-government postgraduate colleges of the State.
The Court observed that the integrity and fairness of an examination process must remain paramount. It was held that where an inquiry indicates the possibility of large-scale irregularities, the authorities would be justified in cancelling the entire selection process.
The said order was passed by the single bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery while disposing of a batch of petitions, including that filed by Kumari Laxmi and others.
The bench also clarified that maintaining the integrity of the recruitment process is the responsibility of the State. If the investigation suggests the possibility of question paper leakage and undue advantage to certain candidates, the decision to annul the results cannot be considered improper.
It also emphasized that,
“………….no candidate has an indefeasible right to be selected or to force the State to conclude an examination process which was tainted since papers of written examination were leaked and candidates were benefited also. It is the fairness which is the utmost object to conduct any examination and under no circumstance it can be permitted to compromise.”
According to the facts of the case, the petitioners had participated in the recruitment process conducted pursuant to Advertisement No. 51 of 2022 for 910 posts of Assistant Professor. The written examination was held on April 16–17, 2025, at 52 examination centres located in six districts of the State for 33 subjects.
Soon after the examination, two FIRs were lodged at Vibhuti Khand and Chinhat police stations in Lucknow alleging that certain persons had supplied the question paper to candidates in exchange for large sums of money.
According to the investigation, the STF identified 21 suspicious mobile numbers after analysing technical data, out of which 19 candidates were found to have qualified in the examination.
Subsequently, the Commission cancelled the earlier declared result by issuing a notice dated January 20, 2026, and decided to conduct a fresh examination.
This decision was challenged by the petitioners before the High Court through the instant petitions.
The counsel for the petitioners contended that the investigation report indicated contact between the accused persons and only 19 candidates, and therefore cancelling the entire examination result was unwarranted.
They further submitted that the authorities ought to have taken action only against the identified candidates instead of nullifying the entire recruitment process. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court judgment in Vanshika Yadav vs. Union of India and others, (2024)2 SCC 743, which, according to them, holds that an entire selection cannot be set aside unless there is convincing evidence of large-scale irregularities.
Opposing the petitions, the State counsel submitted that the STF investigation clearly indicated leakage of the question paper and that at least 19 candidates had benefited from it.
It was also pointed out that two FIRs had been registered and, after completion of investigation, charge-sheets had been filed.
The recruitment was for only 910 posts, and in such circumstances even a limited number of candidates gaining unfair advantage renders the entire process doubtful and tainted, making cancellation of the result the most appropriate course of action.
The Court ruled that,
“The Court also takes note of material brought on record by State-Respondents and Commission that a proper consideration was made at higher level of State on basis of a report of STF that it was a case of systematic irregularities and wide spread unfair means were used, since different papers were leaked and sold to beneficiaries, i.e., candidates. It is not a case where the State has not conducted any inquiry, rather inquiry has contemplated in lodging of two First Information Reports and after investigation two charge sheets have also been filed.”
The Court also found that,
“A possibility is not ruled out that papers were leaked to other candidates also and that they may also get benefit of it, to be included in select list. Impugned decision is, therefore, justified by probability test also.”
Accordingly, the Court found no ground to interference in the impugned order and thus, disposed of the writ petitions.
Case: Km. Lakshmi And 10 Others vs State of U.P. and others
Case No: WRIT – A No. – 1760 of 2026
Date of Order: 17.03.2026
Status: Disposed of
